softheart
01-11-2005, 12:53 PM
TEXAS:
11 January 2005
Further information on UA 299/04 issued 8 November 2004
and re-issued 19 November 2004
Death penalty / Legal concern
USA/Texas: Troy Albert Kunkle
Troy Kunkle (m), white, aged 38, has received a new execution
date of 25 January. He was convicted in 1985 of the murder of
Stephen Horton in 1984. In December 2004, a US Supreme
Court Justice said that Troy Kunkle's death sentence was
imposed in violation of the US Constitution, but that the Court
was procedurally barred by a technical issue of state versus
federal law from remedying that violation.
At the time of the crime, Troy Kunkle was just over 18 years old,
with no criminal record, and emerging from a childhood of
deprivation and abuse (see original UA). It was not discovered
until evaluations conducted long after the trial that Troy Kunkle
suffers from schizophrenia.
At the time of Troy Kunkle's trial, Texas capital juries were only
asked two questions when deciding sentencing: whether the
defendant had caused the death, and whether there was a
probability that the defendant would commit future criminal acts
of violence. An affirmative response to both questions resulted in
a death sentence, regardless of whether the jury believed the
defendant should get a life sentence. This procedure was found
unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court in Penry v Lynaugh in
1989 and the Texas capital statute was changed in 1991 as a
result. Under today's law, Texas capital jurors are additionally
asked whether they consider there is enough mitigating evidence
to warrant a life sentence. Several of the jurors from Troy
Kunkle's trial have since suggested that they would have voted
for a life sentence if they had been asked the mitigation question
(see original UA).
Following the Penry ruling, Troy Kunkle's lawyers began
appealing to the courts that he be granted a new sentencing
hearing. This was based on the grounds that he was sentenced
under an unconstitutional law that had prevented his jury from
giving mitigating effect to evidence presented by his trial
lawyers. For the next 15 years, however, these appeals were
denied. Other Texas death row prisoners in the same situation
were executed during this period without getting new sentencing
hearings. Then, in 2004, in Tennard v Dretke, the US Supreme
Court moved to remedy the situation of lower courts
misapplying the Penry ruling, accusing for example the US
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit of ''invok[ing] its own
restrictive gloss'' on the Penry decision. Several Texas inmates
have been granted new sentencing hearings. However, the Texas
courts have relied upon a procedural technicality to avoid
addressing the merits of Troy Kunkle's claim following the
Tennard ruling. Court rules prevent inmates from repeatedly
filing a claim that they have already lost, but there is no
exception for the situation where the inmate earlier lost the claim
because the court misapplied the law. Nor can the federal courts
intervene because this technical rule is a state law that federal
courts are not allowed to interpret.
On 13 December, the Supreme Court announced that it would
not consider Troy Kunkle's appeal, having stayed his execution
shortly before it was due to be carried out on 18 November.
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the Court did not have
jurisdiction to reach the merits of Troy Kunkle's claim,
explaining that the decision of the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals not to stop the execution had been ''independently based
on a determination of state law'' rather than on the merits of
Kunkle's federal constitutional claim. Justice Stevens said that
this procedural obstacle prevented the Supreme Court from itself
reaching the underlying federal law claim, adding: ''That result is
regrettable because it seems plain that Kunkle's sentence was
imposed in violation of the Constitution''. In other words,
according to Justice Stevens, if a review of Troy Kunkle's claim
was granted, his death sentence would be overturned and he
would be entitled to a new sentencing hearing.
The State of Texas set a new execution date, apparently
unconcerned that Troy Kunkle's death sentence was imposed in
violation of the US Constitution. Texas accounts for 337 of the
945 executions carried out in the USA since 1977, many in
contravention of international safeguards.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Please send appeals to arrive
as quickly as possible, in your own words:
- expressing sympathy for the friends and family of Stephen
Horton, explaining that you are not seeking to condone the
manner of his death or to minimize the suffering caused;
- expressing concern that Troy Kunkle was sentenced to death
under an old law that did not allow the jury to give proper
consideration to mitigating evidence, noting that several jurors
from the trial have since said that they would have voted for life
if not constrained by this now-defunct law;
- noting that no court has ever held a hearing into Troy Kunkle's
claim, that the US Supreme Court has been unable to reach the
merits of this claim due to a purely procedural obstacle, and that
Justice John Paul Stevens has said Troy Kunkle was sentenced in
violation of the US Constitution;
- expressing concern that the jurors who sentenced Troy Kunkle
to death were not presented with any expert mental health
evidence, noting that post-conviction evaluations suggest that he
suffers from serious mental illness, including schizophrenia;
- pointing out that the power of executive clemency exists
precisely to remedy errors that the courts are unwilling or unable
to remedy;
- calling on the Board of Pardons and Paroles to recommend that
the governor commute this death sentence;
- calling on the governor to accept any such recommendation of
clemency, or to issue a reprieve in the event of a
recommendation against clemency and to urge the Board
members to reconsider.
APPEALS TO: (Note: In all appeals please include Troy
Kunkle's prison number: #784)
Rissie Owens, Presiding Officer, Board of Pardons and Paroles,
1300 11th St., Suite 520, P.O. Box 599, Huntsville, TX 77342-0599
Fax: 1 936 291 8367, Salutation: Dear Ms Owens
Elvis Hightower, Board Member, Board of Pardons and Paroles,
1300 11th St., Suite 520, P.O. Box 599, Huntsville, TX 77342-0599
Fax: 1 936 291 8367, Salutation: Dear Mr Hightower
Charles Aycock, Board of Pardons and Paroles, 5809 S.
Western, Suite 237, Amarillo, TX 79110
Fax: 1 806 358 6455, Salutation: Dear Mr Aycock
Linda Garcia, Board of Pardons and Paroles, 1212 N. Velasco,
Suite 201, Angleton, TX 77515
Fax: 1 979 849 8741, Salutation: Dear Ms Garcia
Juanita Gonzalez, Board of Pardons and Paroles, 3408 S. State
Hwy. 36, Gatesville, TX 76528
Fax: 1 254 865 2629, Salutation: Dear Ms Gonzalez
Jose L. Aliseda, Board of Pardons and Paroles, 1111 West Lacy
St., Palestine, TX 75801
Fax: 1 903 723 1441, Salutation: Dear Mr Aliseda
Governor Rick Perry, Office of the Governor, PO Box 12428,
Austin, Texas 78711-2428
Fax: 1 512 463 1849, Email via webpage:
http://www.governor.state.tx.us/contact#contactinfo
Salutation: Dear Governor
PLEASE SEND APPEALS IMMEDIATELY.
All appeals must arrive by 25 January 2005
11 January 2005
Further information on UA 299/04 issued 8 November 2004
and re-issued 19 November 2004
Death penalty / Legal concern
USA/Texas: Troy Albert Kunkle
Troy Kunkle (m), white, aged 38, has received a new execution
date of 25 January. He was convicted in 1985 of the murder of
Stephen Horton in 1984. In December 2004, a US Supreme
Court Justice said that Troy Kunkle's death sentence was
imposed in violation of the US Constitution, but that the Court
was procedurally barred by a technical issue of state versus
federal law from remedying that violation.
At the time of the crime, Troy Kunkle was just over 18 years old,
with no criminal record, and emerging from a childhood of
deprivation and abuse (see original UA). It was not discovered
until evaluations conducted long after the trial that Troy Kunkle
suffers from schizophrenia.
At the time of Troy Kunkle's trial, Texas capital juries were only
asked two questions when deciding sentencing: whether the
defendant had caused the death, and whether there was a
probability that the defendant would commit future criminal acts
of violence. An affirmative response to both questions resulted in
a death sentence, regardless of whether the jury believed the
defendant should get a life sentence. This procedure was found
unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court in Penry v Lynaugh in
1989 and the Texas capital statute was changed in 1991 as a
result. Under today's law, Texas capital jurors are additionally
asked whether they consider there is enough mitigating evidence
to warrant a life sentence. Several of the jurors from Troy
Kunkle's trial have since suggested that they would have voted
for a life sentence if they had been asked the mitigation question
(see original UA).
Following the Penry ruling, Troy Kunkle's lawyers began
appealing to the courts that he be granted a new sentencing
hearing. This was based on the grounds that he was sentenced
under an unconstitutional law that had prevented his jury from
giving mitigating effect to evidence presented by his trial
lawyers. For the next 15 years, however, these appeals were
denied. Other Texas death row prisoners in the same situation
were executed during this period without getting new sentencing
hearings. Then, in 2004, in Tennard v Dretke, the US Supreme
Court moved to remedy the situation of lower courts
misapplying the Penry ruling, accusing for example the US
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit of ''invok[ing] its own
restrictive gloss'' on the Penry decision. Several Texas inmates
have been granted new sentencing hearings. However, the Texas
courts have relied upon a procedural technicality to avoid
addressing the merits of Troy Kunkle's claim following the
Tennard ruling. Court rules prevent inmates from repeatedly
filing a claim that they have already lost, but there is no
exception for the situation where the inmate earlier lost the claim
because the court misapplied the law. Nor can the federal courts
intervene because this technical rule is a state law that federal
courts are not allowed to interpret.
On 13 December, the Supreme Court announced that it would
not consider Troy Kunkle's appeal, having stayed his execution
shortly before it was due to be carried out on 18 November.
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the Court did not have
jurisdiction to reach the merits of Troy Kunkle's claim,
explaining that the decision of the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals not to stop the execution had been ''independently based
on a determination of state law'' rather than on the merits of
Kunkle's federal constitutional claim. Justice Stevens said that
this procedural obstacle prevented the Supreme Court from itself
reaching the underlying federal law claim, adding: ''That result is
regrettable because it seems plain that Kunkle's sentence was
imposed in violation of the Constitution''. In other words,
according to Justice Stevens, if a review of Troy Kunkle's claim
was granted, his death sentence would be overturned and he
would be entitled to a new sentencing hearing.
The State of Texas set a new execution date, apparently
unconcerned that Troy Kunkle's death sentence was imposed in
violation of the US Constitution. Texas accounts for 337 of the
945 executions carried out in the USA since 1977, many in
contravention of international safeguards.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Please send appeals to arrive
as quickly as possible, in your own words:
- expressing sympathy for the friends and family of Stephen
Horton, explaining that you are not seeking to condone the
manner of his death or to minimize the suffering caused;
- expressing concern that Troy Kunkle was sentenced to death
under an old law that did not allow the jury to give proper
consideration to mitigating evidence, noting that several jurors
from the trial have since said that they would have voted for life
if not constrained by this now-defunct law;
- noting that no court has ever held a hearing into Troy Kunkle's
claim, that the US Supreme Court has been unable to reach the
merits of this claim due to a purely procedural obstacle, and that
Justice John Paul Stevens has said Troy Kunkle was sentenced in
violation of the US Constitution;
- expressing concern that the jurors who sentenced Troy Kunkle
to death were not presented with any expert mental health
evidence, noting that post-conviction evaluations suggest that he
suffers from serious mental illness, including schizophrenia;
- pointing out that the power of executive clemency exists
precisely to remedy errors that the courts are unwilling or unable
to remedy;
- calling on the Board of Pardons and Paroles to recommend that
the governor commute this death sentence;
- calling on the governor to accept any such recommendation of
clemency, or to issue a reprieve in the event of a
recommendation against clemency and to urge the Board
members to reconsider.
APPEALS TO: (Note: In all appeals please include Troy
Kunkle's prison number: #784)
Rissie Owens, Presiding Officer, Board of Pardons and Paroles,
1300 11th St., Suite 520, P.O. Box 599, Huntsville, TX 77342-0599
Fax: 1 936 291 8367, Salutation: Dear Ms Owens
Elvis Hightower, Board Member, Board of Pardons and Paroles,
1300 11th St., Suite 520, P.O. Box 599, Huntsville, TX 77342-0599
Fax: 1 936 291 8367, Salutation: Dear Mr Hightower
Charles Aycock, Board of Pardons and Paroles, 5809 S.
Western, Suite 237, Amarillo, TX 79110
Fax: 1 806 358 6455, Salutation: Dear Mr Aycock
Linda Garcia, Board of Pardons and Paroles, 1212 N. Velasco,
Suite 201, Angleton, TX 77515
Fax: 1 979 849 8741, Salutation: Dear Ms Garcia
Juanita Gonzalez, Board of Pardons and Paroles, 3408 S. State
Hwy. 36, Gatesville, TX 76528
Fax: 1 254 865 2629, Salutation: Dear Ms Gonzalez
Jose L. Aliseda, Board of Pardons and Paroles, 1111 West Lacy
St., Palestine, TX 75801
Fax: 1 903 723 1441, Salutation: Dear Mr Aliseda
Governor Rick Perry, Office of the Governor, PO Box 12428,
Austin, Texas 78711-2428
Fax: 1 512 463 1849, Email via webpage:
http://www.governor.state.tx.us/contact#contactinfo
Salutation: Dear Governor
PLEASE SEND APPEALS IMMEDIATELY.
All appeals must arrive by 25 January 2005